RT Journal Article
SR Electronic
T1 Faecal shedding models for SARS-CoV-2 RNA among hospitalised patients and implications for wastewater-based epidemiology
JF medRxiv
FD Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory Press
SP 2021.03.16.21253603
DO 10.1101/2021.03.16.21253603
A1 Hoffmann, Till
A1 Alsing, Justin
YR 2023
UL http://medrxiv.org/content/early/2023/01/24/2021.03.16.21253603.abstract
AB Summary The concentration of SARS-CoV-2 RNA in faeces is not well established, posing challenges for wastewater-based surveillance of COVID-19 and risk assessments of environmental transmission. We develop versatile hierarchical models for faecal RNA shedding and apply them to data collected in six studies. We find that the mean number of gene copies per mL of faeces is 1.9 × 106 (2.3 × 105–2.0 × 108 95% credible interval) among unvaccinated hospitalised patients. Using Bayesian model comparison, we find no evidence for a subpopulation of patients who do not shed RNA: limits of quantification can account for negative stool samples. Our models indicate that hospitalised patients represent the tail of the shedding profile with a half-life of 34 hours (28–43 95% credible interval), suggesting that wastewater-based surveillance signals are more indicative of incidence than prevalence and can be a leading indicator of clinical presentation. Shedding among inpatients cannot explain high RNA concentrations observed in wastewater, consistent with more abundant shedding during the early infection course. We show that the models generalise and can predict summary statistics of held-out clinical datasets. However, shedding prior to hospitalisation cannot be constrained due to lack of samples, and information on viral variants was not available.Competing Interest StatementTH consults the Department for Health and Social Care on statistical analysis of data for wastewater-based surveillance of COVID-19.Funding StatementThis work was supported by the Natural Environment Research Council grant number NE/V010387/1.Author DeclarationsI confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.YesThe details of the IRB/oversight body that provided approval or exemption for the research described are given below:The study was reviewed by the Research Governance and Integrity Team at Imperial College London. Because only publicly available data were used, the study does not require review by the Imperial College Research Ethics Committee.I confirm that all necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived, and that any patient/participant/sample identifiers included were not known to anyone (e.g., hospital staff, patients or participants themselves) outside the research group so cannot be used to identify individuals.YesI understand that all clinical trials and any other prospective interventional studies must be registered with an ICMJE-approved registry, such as ClinicalTrials.gov. I confirm that any such study reported in the manuscript has been registered and the trial registration ID is provided (note: if posting a prospective study registered retrospectively, please provide a statement in the trial ID field explaining why the study was not registered in advance).YesI have followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines and uploaded the relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material as supplementary files, if applicable.YesThe data analysed during the current study and custom computer code are available at https://github.com/tillahoffmann/shedding. https://github.com/tillahoffmann/shedding